ther both sincerely and
heartily.

There was, however, another reason which helps to explain the great
value which Fitzjames attached from the first to this intercourse. It
comes out in almost every letter in his part of their correspondence.
Fitzjames calls himself 'self-contained'; and the epithet is quite
appropriate if it is taken as not implying any connotation of real
selfishness. He was, that is, sufficient for himself; he was contented
so long as he could feel, as he always had a right to feel, that he was
doing his work thoroughly to the very best of his abilities. He could
dispense with much appreciation from outside, though it was unaffectedly
welcome when it came from competent persons. He had too much
self-reliance to be dependent upon any endorsement by others. But,
though this might be perfectly true, he was at bottom sensitive enough,
and it was also true that he felt keenly certain consequences of his
position. His professional career, as I have so often said, had been a
series of tantalising half-successes; he was always being baffled by
cross winds at the harbour-mouth. Although his courage never failed for
an instant, he could not but have a certain sense of isolation or want
of support. This was especially true of the codification schemes which
occupied so much of his thought. He had been crying in the market-place
and no man heeded him. Yet his voice was powerful enough morally as well
as physically. He had the warmest of friends. Some of them were devoted
to pursuits which had nothing to do with law and could only express a
vague general sympathy. They admired his general vigour, but were not
specially interested in the ends to which it was applied. Others, on the
contrary, were politicians and lawyers who could have given him
effectual help. But they almost unanimously refused to take his plans
seriously. The British barrister and member of Parliament looked upon
codification as at best a harmless fancy. 'A jurist,' Fitzjames
sometimes remarks in a joke, which was not all joking, is a 'fool who
cannot get briefs.' That represents the view generally taken of his own
energy. It was possibly admirable, certainly unobjectionable, but not to
the purpose. The statesman saw little chance of gaining votes by offers
of a code, and the successful lawyer was too much immersed in his briefs
to care about investigating general principles of law. At last, as I
have said, Fitzjames got a disciple or two in high